Steve Ellner's Blog on Venezuela, Latin America and Beyond

The centralization of ownership of the private media in the United States and elsewhere has become increasingly pronounced, at the same time that its reporting has become increasingly one-sided and monolithic. My blog seeks to expose this lack of objectivity and present alternative ideas that point in the direction of much-needed fundamental change.

Monday, February 29, 2016

A RIVETING ACCOUNT OF THE CHILE OF PINOCHET

There is absolutely no comparison between alleged human rights violation
in Cuba and the atrocities committed by the Pinochet government as a result of the
1973 U.S.-backed coup in Chile.

This New York Times article is a moving account of a Chilean 18-year
old who was drafted into the army just months before the coup and the atrocities
that he witnessed and engaged in. Now almost 50 years later he has come forth with
his story in an attempt to overcome the nightmares and emotional stress, in spite
of the threats he receives and pleas from his wife. The man is obviously desperate, even though none of the conscripts of that era have been jailed for human rights abuses.
Can the execution of Batista thugs in Cuba
in 1959 or the jailings of Cuban dissidents (whether they were justified or not)
be placed in the same category? Obviously not. Yet the U.S. corporate media has
published 10 or 20 times more (or is it 50 times more?) articles about the jailing
of Cuban dissidents than the atrocities committed by military governments in Latin
America in the 60s and 70s. This article in today’s New York Times is an exception.

Monday, February 22, 2016

FOR THE U.S. GOVERNMENT, THE ISSUE OF HUMAN RIGHTS ABROAD IS A SMOKE SCREEN

Washington just announced
that the U.S. would strengthen economic ties with Argentina. The stated rational
for the move is that the government of Mauricio Macri has proved to be, in the
words of Deputy Security Advisor Ben Rhodes, a “strong voice for democracy and
human rights in Latin America.” What better example of how the issue of human
rights is a smoke screen that justifies U.S. policy in favor of economic
interests and geopolitical objectives. “Democracy and Human Rights?” Is it because
Macri is repealing a law that prevents monopoly control of the communications media?
What about Macri’s clamping down on freedom of expression in Argentina? It would
seem that Macri’s fervent support for the Venezuelan opposition is what qualifies
him to be a champion of Latin American democracy.

Sunday, February 21, 2016

WAS THE NEVADA CAUCUS RESULTS A “VICTORY” FOR HILLARY CLINTON?

52.7
PERCENT IS A RESOUNDING VICTORY? That’s what much of the U.S. media has to say about
Hillary Clinton’s intake in yesterday’s Nevada caucus. When you consider that she
had the entire Democratic Party establishment and corporate media on her side, and
Wall Street capital solidly backing her and had an overwhelming majority of votes
according to polls conducted several months ago, this is hardly a victory. Everything
to the contrary. It shows how discontent and incensed a large chunk of the population
feels about how the cards are stacked against them and in favor of the privileged
one percent. The media should give more space to the Bernie Sanders phenomenon
and less to the Republican Party circus that goes by the euphemism “primaries.”

Saturday, February 13, 2016

BERNIE SANDERS IS TO THE LEFT OF FDR IN MANY WAYS

To a great extent Sanders is more radical (in the good sense of the
word) than were Franklin Roosevelt and the FDR-wing of the Democratic Party. First, he has the
entire political establishment against him, including its moderate-liberal
wing. Moderate-liberal leaders, almost without exception, are supporting
Hillary (including the Black Caucus, Michael Dukakis, Howard Dean, and the
list goes on and on). As a fitting response, Sanders calls for a revolution
from below.

Second, he attacks his adversaries super-aggressively. His attack on
Kissinger in the last debate is just one example. Another is his refusal to
minimize the importance of Hillary's Wall Street ties, and his statement in the
last debate that 'Americans are not stupid' (or some such words) in
response to Hillary's claim that Wall Street patronage does not
influence her positions. The Democrats tend to treat their adversaries to
their right with kid gloves, while often lashing out at the left (that's the
treatment Nader got). Sanders' performance in the last two debates (the fourth
and fifth) was crisp and clear as he lashed out at the establishment on many
different fronts and issues.

And third, he is not a member of the Democratic Party, which may ease
the immigration of his rank-and-file supporters to a third party.

Sunday, February 7, 2016

Bill Clinton: Unprincipled Attacks on Bernie Sanders

BILL
CLINTON CALLING BERNIE SANDERS A “SEXIST” SOUNDS SOMETHING LIKE AN OXYMORON.
His mudslinging in which he also calls Bernie hypocritical shows how desperate
the Clintons are. Bernie is harping on the issues and avoids name-calling. One
of the issues, however, is Wall Street finance in politics and that has
everything to do with the way big economic interests have bankrolled Hillary
Clinton’s campaign. She laughed off a request that she present her talking
points for the 3 speeches she gave Goldman Sachs in one year, for which she
received $675,000 dollars. Of course, that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Check
out the big money she has received from the likes of Citygroup, JP Morgan
Chase, DLA Piper (the multinational law firm), Time Warner (yes media
corporations donate large sums of money to a given candidate, and then they claim
to be evenhanded!), 21st Century Fox, and the list goes on and on: https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cid=N00000019&cycle=Career

About Me

Steve Ellner has taught economic history at the Universidad de Oriente in Puerto La Cruz, Venezuela since 1977. He is the author of numerous books and journal and magazine articles on Venezuela history and politics. He frequently lectures on Venezuela and Latin American political developments in the U.S. and elsewhere. He received his Ph.D. in Latin American history at the University of New Mexico in 1980.